 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Hello,
This is now a correct render of the Benchmark v1.02 with 1152x768.
I've made some slight changes:
- Gave each Julia a different color.
- Gave the POV-Ray texts T-stone18 and 21 from "stones.inc".
- Gave the varies sections of the sockets an ad random shifted texture so
they
are not casted from one rock any more.
- Changed the camera angle to 55 (was 45) and the look_at a little bit
higher
so everything fits in the picture that has a different aspect ratio
then the original.
- Put Photons to the SuperEllipsoids and the Logo, so every reflecting
object can
contribute. (You can see a tiny contribution from the Supers, but
nothing from the
Logo).
- Changed the pretrace of the Radiosity to 0.04 - 0.005.
My PIII 450MHz has crawled over this picture with the amazing mean speed of
4.01
pixels per second and it made me clear that it needed a rest for it stopped
working when I closed several windows just after it finished the picture.
Any comment about the changes I made?
Jaap Frank
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download 'benchmark_jjf_Photon5.jpg' (429 KB)
Preview of image 'benchmark_jjf_Photon5.jpg'
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
I don't know much about benchmarking,but I really like the image :-).
Could you post the source so I could make a high res render and printout.
Sebastian H.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Sun, 21 Jul 2002 12:27:11 +0200, Sebastian H. wrote...
> I don't know much about benchmarking,but I really like the image :-).
> Could you post the source so I could make a high res render and printout.
Look for benchmark.pov in the POV 3.5 official install :)
Jamie.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Jaap Frank wrote:
>
> [...]
>
> Any comment about the changes I made?
>
Esthetics are mainly a matter of taste of course, but the new colors you
introduced really don't look nice IMO.
The photons on the logo and the superellipsoids really won't have much
effect. Having them on the water would be much more interesting.
Christoph
--
POV-Ray tutorials, IsoWood include,
TransSkin and more: http://www.tu-bs.de/~y0013390/
Last updated 15 Jul. 2002 _____./\/^>_*_<^\/\.______
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Sebastian H." <seb### [at] web de> wrote in message
news:3D3### [at] webde...
> I don't know much about benchmarking,but I really like the image :-).
> Could you post the source so I could make a high res render and printout.
>
> Sebastian H.
>
Sebastian,
you have it already. You can find it in ../scenes/advanced and it is the
official POV-Ray benchmark. It's there to test the speed of your machine.
If you are going for a still larger resolution and use the settings of this
file, you are going to need lots of time. The picture of this post took
72 hours with a PIII 450MHz 1GB, so memory was not the problem.
It was the extra quality for the radiosity that took most of the time, so
don't push it to high. (I raised the recursion level to 3, but I think now
1 or 2 is sufficient.)
O yes, if you change something in the objects placing,
z is up in this file!
Good luck with it,
Jaap Frank
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Christoph Hormann" <chr### [at] gmxde> wrote in message
news:3D3A9FAE.6B3433B3@gmx.de...
>
> Esthetics are mainly a matter of taste of course, but the new colors you
> introduced really don't look nice IMO.
I agree about the colors of the POV-Ray text. They appear nice in a tiny
render, but somewhat disappointing in the big one.
The colors of the Julia's are nice in mine opinion, but that is a matter of
taste.
> The photons on the logo and the superellipsoids really won't have much
> effect. Having them on the water would be much more interesting.
>
I have tried the Photons on all reflecting objects separately, but with the
water, after shooting about 2 000 000 photons, none were collected and
I stopped the test. I think that's because only a very small portion of the
water surface is actually hit by the light source. Maybe if I have a faster
machine I try it again, but now it takes to much time.
Another possibility would be a method to direct the photon test to a part
of an object, but I can't figure out how this must be done. An object in
front of the part with no_image and no_shadow? I don't think it will
work.
Thank you for you kind reactions,
Jaap Frank.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Jaap Frank wrote:
>
> [...]
> Another possibility would be a method to direct the photon test to a part
> of an object, but I can't figure out how this must be done. An object in
> front of the part with no_image and no_shadow? I don't think it will
> work.
Have a look at:
http://www-public.tu-bs.de:8080/~y0013390/pov/water/water06.html
for how to accomplish that, but i doubt this would be very useful in this
scene.
Christoph
--
POV-Ray tutorials, IsoWood include,
TransSkin and more: http://www.tu-bs.de/~y0013390/
Last updated 15 Jul. 2002 _____./\/^>_*_<^\/\.______
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Christoph Hormann" <chr### [at] gmxde> wrote in message
news:3D3AB5A2.597A65C0@gmx.de...
>
>
> Jaap Frank wrote:
> >
> > [...]
> > Another possibility would be a method to direct the photon test to a
part
> > of an object, but I can't figure out how this must be done. An object in
> > front of the part with no_image and no_shadow? I don't think it will
> > work.
>
> Have a look at:
>
> http://www-public.tu-bs.de:8080/~y0013390/pov/water/water06.html
>
> for how to accomplish that, but i doubt this would be very useful in this
> scene.
>
> Christoph
Smart solution!! I can use that in a project I was thinking about.
Thanks, it's in my favourites now.
Jaap Frank
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
I really like the image! A few gripes though (of course.) The water
surface looks "off" to me. It comes across like a partially frozen water,
The dunes (on the left side) have two straight lines in them. I guess that
is okay but it looks mechanical to me
"Jaap Frank" <jjf### [at] xs4allnl> wrote in message
news:3d39ef52@news.povray.org...
> Hello,
>
> This is now a correct render of the Benchmark v1.02 with 1152x768.
>
> I've made some slight changes:
> - Gave each Julia a different color.
> - Gave the POV-Ray texts T-stone18 and 21 from "stones.inc".
> - Gave the varies sections of the sockets an ad random shifted texture
so
> they
> are not casted from one rock any more.
> - Changed the camera angle to 55 (was 45) and the look_at a little bit
> higher
> so everything fits in the picture that has a different aspect ratio
> then the original.
> - Put Photons to the SuperEllipsoids and the Logo, so every reflecting
> object can
> contribute. (You can see a tiny contribution from the Supers, but
> nothing from the
> Logo).
> - Changed the pretrace of the Radiosity to 0.04 - 0.005.
>
> My PIII 450MHz has crawled over this picture with the amazing mean speed
of
> 4.01
> pixels per second and it made me clear that it needed a rest for it
stopped
> working when I closed several windows just after it finished the picture.
>
> Any comment about the changes I made?
>
> Jaap Frank
>
>
>
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Patrick Dugan" <pat### [at] netinsnet> wrote in message
news:3d3b8ee1@news.povray.org...
> I really like the image! A few gripes though (of course.) The water
> surface looks "off" to me. It comes across like a partially frozen water,
> The dunes (on the left side) have two straight lines in them. I guess
that
> is okay but it looks mechanical to me
>
If you take a look in the Benchmark v 1.02 in ../scenes/advanced/ (v3.5)
you will see that the credits for the creation of the file must not go to me
but to:
Assembled by Christoph Hormann
// Contributions by:
// - Ingo Janssen
// - Mick Hazelgrove
They have created this file to test the speed of the machines that do the
real work (crunching numbers) and have put as much new features as
is possible in this file. The actual testing is without Photons and Radio-
sity, but that is already included for future still faster machines.
When I did a small render, I liked the scene and wanted a big render
with all features activated. Boy, you really need a fast machine then!!
About your remarks:
The two strait lines are pure coincidence I think and are not that strait.
About the water I can say that they used 'f_ridged_mf' from the internal
functions once for the normal. The dunes are made from the same
function and this is an 'isosurface' with 'normal' of the same function.
I think you mean that the water surface is too much rounded off. If you
play with this function( I did for mountains), you will find out that you
can change it to a more rough appearance by choosing more higher
frequencies. Maybe if you combine more functions, the looks will be
better, but that slows down the render speed. I suspect that's the
reason that it is kept simple, but that is a assumption from me. If you
want to know you better ask Christoph Hormann.
Thanks for the reaction,
Jaap Frank
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
